White Plains
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00002327(1).jpg
This legal document argues that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, was denied her Sixth Amendment right to a grand jury selected from a fair cross-section of the community. It cites a parallel case, U.S. v. Balde, and an expert analysis by Jeffrey Martin, which found significant underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic individuals in the White Plains jury wheel. Because Ms. Maxwell's grand jury was drawn from the same pool, the document contends this analysis applies to her case as well.
DOJ-OGR-00002325.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Statement of Facts) dated January 25, 2021, arguing that Ghislaine Maxwell's indictment should be dismissed due to Sixth Amendment violations. The defense contends that while the alleged crimes occurred at Epstein's Manhattan residence, the government improperly used a grand jury from White Plains due to COVID-19 protocols, deviating from established practice.
DOJ-OGR-00002325(1).jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Statement of Facts) dated January 25, 2021, arguing that Ghislaine Maxwell's indictment should be dismissed due to Sixth Amendment violations. The defense contends that while the alleged crimes occurred at Epstein's Manhattan residence, the government improperly used a grand jury from White Plains due to COVID-19 protocols, deviating from established practice.
DOJ-OGR-00002963.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, is part of a criminal case and argues against several defense motions, such as dismissing charges and severing the case. It provides a background of the legal proceedings, noting that a grand jury indicted the defendant on June 29, 2020, leading to her arrest by the FBI on July 2, 2020, and a subsequent superseding indictment. The charges outlined include conspiracy with Jeffrey Epstein to entice and transport minors for illegal sexual acts.
DOJ-OGR-00002938.jpg
This document is a table of contents for a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 16, 2021. It outlines legal arguments against various motions made by the defendant, including challenges to the indictment, requests for disclosure, and the propriety of using a grand jury in White Plains. The filing also addresses the defendant's claim that the grand jury unfairly represented Blacks or Hispanics.
DOJ-OGR-00002840.jpg
This document is page 19 of a court filing (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC) filed on March 24, 2021, regarding the case of United States v. Schulte. The text details the Court's rejection of Schulte's arguments concerning violations of the Jury Selection and Service Act (JSSA), specifically regarding the exclusion of inactive voters and the proration of jurors from Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland counties. The Court cites precedent from *United States v. Allen* and Judge Roman to validate the Government's decision to indict in White Plains.
DOJ-OGR-00002830.jpg
This legal document, page 9 of a court filing dated March 24, 2021, details a court's analysis of a dispute between the defendant, Schulte, and the Government over the proper 'relevant community' for jury selection. The court sides with the Government, ruling that the appropriate jury pool is the White Plains master wheel, which draws from all counties in the Southern District, rather than just those that supply jurors to Manhattan where the trial is to be held. This decision is based on legal precedent and the statutory composition of the judicial district.
DOJ-OGR-00002838.jpg
This document is page 17 of a court order filed on March 24, 2021, in the case United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC). The text details the Court's rejection of the defendant's (Schulte) challenges regarding jury selection, specifically concerning the 'fair cross-section' requirement of the Sixth Amendment and an 'Equal Protection' challenge under the Fifth Amendment. The Court dismisses arguments regarding the underrepresentation of African American and Hispanic American jurors, citing a lack of discriminatory intent and noting that a technical glitch in the White Plains master wheel actually increased minority representation rather than diminishing it.
DOJ-OGR-00002837.jpg
This document is page 16 of a court filing (Document 589) filed on March 24, 2021, in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC). The text details the Court's rejection of Schulte's arguments that the Jury Plan systematically excludes African Americans and Hispanic Americans. The Court rules that factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the frequency of people moving residences, and the use of voter registration lists do not constitute constitutional violations under the Sixth or Fifth Amendments.
DOJ-OGR-00002836.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a brief arguing against a defendant named Schulte's challenge to the jury selection process. The argument asserts that Schulte fails to prove 'systematic exclusion' because the alleged underrepresentation of minority jurors was due to external factors, not the jury selection system itself, citing multiple legal precedents. Schulte's specific claim that the Government sought an indictment in White Plains to avoid the more diverse jury pool of Manhattan is presented as the core of his foreclosed allegation.
DOJ-OGR-00002835.jpg
This document is page 14 of a court order filed on August 24, 2021, in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548). The text analyzes a Sixth Amendment challenge regarding jury underrepresentation, specifically examining the 'absolute disparity method' for African American and Hispanic American representation in the White Plains master jury wheel. The Court concludes that the statistical disparities (1.25% and 1.15%) are within tolerated legal limits based on Second Circuit precedents and that Schulte has failed to meet the necessary burden for his claim.
DOJ-OGR-00002834.jpg
This page is from a legal filing (Document 189) in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC), filed on March 24, 2021. The text discusses a legal dispute regarding jury selection venues, specifically distinguishing the current case from *United States v. Johnson*. The court argues that unlike in *Johnson*, Schulte's grand and petit juries were drawn from different courthouses, invalidating his argument regarding the 'relevant community' for the jury pool. The document mentions the 'underrepresentation analysis' and the 'absolute disparity method' for assessing jury fairness. While comprised in a dataset potentially related to Epstein, the text explicitly concerns Joshua Schulte (likely the CIA Vault 7 case).
DOJ-OGR-00002829.jpg
This document is page 8 of a court order filed on March 26, 2021, in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548). The text addresses a legal dispute regarding 'Underrepresentation' in jury selection, specifically defining the 'Relevant Jury Venire.' The defendant (Schulte) argued for the use of the White Plains 'qualified wheel,' while the Government argued for the 'master wheel.' The Court ruled in favor of the Government, concluding that the White Plains master wheel is the relevant jury venire for the fair cross-section analysis.
DOJ-OGR-00002825.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing dated March 26, 2021, likely relating to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial given the timeline and context of jury selection in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). It outlines the procedural mechanics of the 'Jury Plan,' detailing how master jury wheels are constructed from voter registration lists in specific NY counties (Manhattan, Bronx, Westchester, etc.) to ensure proportionate representation. A footnote clarifies qualification criteria for jurors, including English proficiency, citizenship, and exemptions for hardship or occupation.
DOJ-OGR-00002820.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated March 26, 2021, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, who is presiding over the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecution informs the court of a recent ruling in a separate case, U.S. v. Schulte, where Judge Crotty denied a motion to dismiss the indictment that was 'virtually identical' to one filed by Maxwell. The government argues that this precedent supports their position that Maxwell's motion should also be denied.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016773.jpg
This document is page A33 of 46 from Donald J. Trump's OGE Form 278e financial disclosure. It details the corporate structure, ownership percentages, and managing members for several entities, including Trump Marks Westchester, Trump Miami Resort Management, Trump National Golf Clubs (Colts Neck and Westchester), and notably Trump Model Management LLC, of which Annie Veltri is listed as a 15% owner. The document bears a House Oversight Committee stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_033389.jpg
An email exchange from January 2018 between pilot Larry Visoski and Jeffrey Epstein regarding flight logistics to Florida. Visoski informs Epstein that due to President Trump's presence ('POTUS') in Palm Beach, specific 'gateway' airports must be used, and standard airports like Bedford are not available options. Epstein approves Visoski's request to arrange parking at Boca Raton to accommodate these restrictions.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity